DICK SMALLS AUTO MOTIVE WE CAN HANDLE ALL OF YOUR REPAIR AND SERVICE NEEDS INCLUDING CALL US NOW!(301) 931-3300. 10111B BACOCON DRIVE,BELTSVILLE,MD 20705

Abou & Kichai home repairs. We're your complete solution to every major and minor home repair and installation. For more information please contact (301)728-3977 OR (202)261-0671. Email: tembastanley@gmail.com - swahilivilla@gmail.com

Facebook

Saturday, July 22, 2017

US leaks, the media, and a Saudi coup that wasn’t

By Firas Maksad Saturday, 22 July 2017

Over the course of the Cold War, a set of generally agreed upon guidelines, dubbed “The Moscow Rules,” are said to have developed amongst American intelligence agents operating within the borders of the Soviet Union.

The cover of the New York Post newspaper is seen with other papers at a newsstand in New York US, November 9, 2016. (Reuters)

One rule that stood out and has since been popularized by Hollywood movies is the old adage, “Once is an accident. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is enemy action.”

This week, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and Reuters, all printed articles citing anonymous US officials alleging that Saudi Arabia’s new Crown Prince, Mohamad Bin Salman, carried out a coup against his cousin, Mohamad Bin Nayef, to become Saudi Arabia’s heir apparent.

Given the near-simultaneous publication of these three articles and the anonymous sources cited by all three papers, Saudi watchers and foreign officials are interpreting this disclosure as a hit job orchestrated by one or two individuals in the US government.

However, the issue does not lie with these one or two individuals who, for personal or political reasons and without the prior knowledge of their superiors decided to speak, but with three of our most venerated press institutions which failed to properly corroborate the information provided.

This 19 September photo shows the front pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post. (AFP)

The succession

With regard to the Saudi succession, the leaker’s evidence that a coup had taken place revolved around powerful imagery: Mohammed Bin Nayef’s phone being taken away, his allegedly being ushered into a palace room in Mecca where “a guard stood with his hand on a holstered gun, in what people familiar with the royal court’s traditions say is a violation of the protocol around the crown prince.”

The New York Times added that “General Abdulaziz al-Huwairini, a colleague of Mohammed bin Nayef who was crucial to the security relationship with the United States,” was also placed under house arrest.

This information was not corroborated. If it had, it would have been reported that, prior to meetings of the Royal Court, it is standard procedure to remove all phones to safeguard against electronic eavesdropping. Anyone who visits a US embassy knows that comparable precautions are employed for similar reasons.